On December the 5th. 2000, Dr.Rita Pal from NHS Exposed
replies to the italian embassy scientific attaché .
Here is the e-mails text reported in full.
Subject: FINAL CORRISPONDENCE - Closure of Case .
I state again
a) Police report
b) Taped conversation
" I want to go home , .... to Palermo "
A person should not be under the mental health act because of her son .
I had no idea Mr Errante was ringing you .
You did lie to me as you would have known what your own consulate was doing
You promised her an independent psychiatrist opinion . You have thus
refuted that .
I would have been happy if the decision had been made after
a proper assessment .
As I have said it is not for you to judge the guilt of Mr Errante - it is
for the courts .
I apologise for my sarcasm . My conscience cannot live with a lady who is
trapped because of her son .
You have no right to force a lady to live with
no freedom .
I will use your emails which are proof enough that you have gone back on
your words time and time again with a four month delay .
I will note that you do not wish to correspond in writing to myself .
I cannot believe so called Catholics can live with their consciences and
spend Christmas after sentencing a lady without looking at any other
evidence or solution .
That is your decision and I am pleased you have to
live with it and not me . I hope you ensure it is befitting for te religion
the Embassy belongs to .
I have not threatened you - I merely state the facts as they are . That is
hurting your conscience because you yourself are being led by people who do
not even have the relevant papers to the case nor the medical experience
with which to make a judgement .
You have made your mind up . We say in our religion that those in power who
make life simpler for themselves suffer in their future life . One day I
hope that when you are elderly that you suffer what Mrs Caminita is
suffering and know and realise what it feels like to be trapped .
You do owe me an apology - because you have gone back on everything you have
promised me . You have in addition , made a decision on convenience ,
finances and the fact that you simply have no idea what the right decision
is therefore you follow the others without even reading or considering the
The world is a complicated place . If Mr Errante is innocent which is
possible - you i.e. the Embassy will be the one who is responsible for
dictating that his mother remains where she is because any other solution
will be far too difficult .
I have suggested a court order against Mr Errante in Italy and secure
accommodation for her . It is an easy solution which you can easily do .
You have made your decision and I respect your position. As God is my
witness Professor - if Mr Errante is innocent - you and you personally will
be responsible for imprisoning a lady for the crimes of her son . This is
unjust and unfair . I am not talking of legal action or any form of action
within the society we live in . I am talking of something higher in terms of
fate and the duty we owe to those who are elderly and frail . Each and
everyone of us owe a duty to them and to protect their freedom .
I am sorry you consider the truth as threats . Most people would say that
when the truth hurts the conscience then people like you try and avoid
people like me because to argue with reason without getting " annoyed and
angry " would be accepting that there may be a problem with your decision
itself . The reason is because you know I speak the truth and you know I am
right . Your decision is based on your view of Mr Errante - not Mrs Caminita
requirements . I cannot envisage any foreigner wishing to stay in a strange
place where the Embassy ignores her for years then suddenly to save face go
and visit her . Verbal remarks and third part inferences do not stand in
court I am afraid .
You have listened to nothing I have said and your brain is shut because you
would rather think you made the correct decision because you live with an
incorrect one would be a terrible thing .
I will not correspond with your further as requested . I have explained to
you that your Bible states one thing and your practical mind states another
We all have choices we have to make in life . In addition , we all know and
realise the consequences of our decisions .
While you are with you family - she is with no-one . You have destroyed any
hope we had of bringing Mr Errante back for trial .
As I said - we all make decisions . Yours is right in your eyes but not in
the eyes of what we in our country term God .
I will not communicate with you further but if Mr Errante is innocent after
I have seen all the pictures and obtained an opinion then I will not be
responsible for what is said in the media about the lethargy and inaction .
By the way - to protect a person against another - you obtaining a
retraining order - not the Mental Health Act . There is nothing stopping you
from obtaining guardianship via the ItalianEmbassy and ensuring she is kept
safe in a private nursing home either here or Italy but you will not . What
motivates you in life Professor - money , power or would you consider that
an attack from myself as well .
Merry Christmas best of luck with your decision which is most convenient to
NB your officials have no practical medical training whatsoever . How do you
expect them to know what the best thing for an elderly person with medical
problems is? Your logic defeats me .
Dr Rita Pal
PS My regards to Mr Amaduzzi .
The case now will transfer to a solicitor and a barrister who will act on Mr
Errante behalf . Something I have ensured for him - which was your duty as
an Embassy .
I pity any other Italian who falls foul to the logic of your
COMMUNICATION TERMINATED FOR THE FUTURE .
SUMMARY OF CASE DISCHARGE
ERRANTE v Italian Embassy - via ECHR (European Court for Human Rights)
Regina v Errante - Taken over via legal advisers
Errante v Bedfordshire Social Services - Legal advisers
NB Correspondence to be transferred .
Mr Errante and Legal advisers .
Embassy officials denied assistance . Did not assist in Extradition
Failure to assist NHS Exposed to bring Mr Errante to this
Failure to ensure safety of Italian citizen in Italy while
ensuring British Tax papers finances are spent to fund her care .
Negotiation period - 4 months .
Criticism - delays , no response . no lead visit , no independent assessment
by Embassy .
Refusal to maintain human rights .
Professor Aloj refusal to
Discussion misleading .
Personal attack on my motives .
Refusal to complete discussion in writing formally, despite my efforts .
Errante - legal assistance achieved - duty failed by Embassy .
Denial of legal assistance .
Mrs Caminita - denial of independent organisation to visit against
guardianship laws and Mental Health Act .
Evidence of breach of Article 10
by Embassy and Social Services .
Case taken by legal advisers .
Case closed .
Documentation available for
investigation by legal advisers and evidence for ECHR and Courts in this
Police not informed at present as Italian Embassy refuses to assist in
negotiations therefore there is no point .
Case Closed .
NHS EXPOSED R Pal
Personal Comment :
Disappointing collapse of potentially good negotiations.
Professor Aloj -
misleading and lack of assistance .
No reply from Mr Amaduzzi .
sent to Mrs Caminita with their names on . Charge £60 . No comment from
Lack of concern as she is elderly and frail ie what is the point
of assisting someone who is old - attitude Article 14 potential .
disappointing case to date due to obstructive nature of Embassy .
expected more from Italians as assumed they respected elders .
Abuse of MHA
Abuse of HRA .
One wonders whether Mr Errante is infact right about his
allegations of corruption . We shall never know .
Case done without
charge to family or Mr Errante .
Will advise lawyers accordingly .
cc Barrister in charge . Legal Advisers .
------------ Original Message -------------
From: Professor Salvatore M. Aloj,
To: NHS EXPOSED
Cc: Vice-Consolalato d'Italia in Bedford
Sent: 07 December 2000 10:24
Subject: Re: Please state your final decision in writing to me to complete our discussions
Dear Dr Pal,
Thank you for your recent correspondence.
I am afraid I am not going to write you any letter since you are not
in the position of requiring anything from me.
I my correspondence with you I have tried in several ways to explain
that my position with regard to Mrs Margherita
Caminita is justified
by the reports I have received by two different official
representatives of my Government,
who have visited more than once Mrs
Caminita, whose views on what is currently best for Mrs Caminita are
I hope you understand that under these
circumstances my choice is clear.
I am no longer amenable
to tolerate your threats, sarcasm and
derogatory remarks on my approach to the problem, nor I can tolerate
Mr Erratnte cursing at me on the telephone.
There is no doubt in my
mind that what I have done so far is right
given the circumstances;
if you think otherwise it is not my problem since I am not prepared
to bend to your pressure
for as long as I believe it is not justified.
I most vehemently reject your accusation that I have made offensive
remarks about your work; thus, I owe you no apology.
I did not lie to
you since I did not know that Mrs Caminita was
visited by our
representatives in Bedford.
I reiterate that I have honestly
attempted to cooperate with you on this
case but I now realize it is
impossible for you refuse to accept or discuss my views in a
constructive, civilized way .
I am afraid I have left no option but to terminate our correspondence.
Professor Salvatore M. Aloj
Scientific Attache', Embassy of Italy
14, Three Kings Yard
LONDON, W1K 4EH, U.K.
U N B E L I E V A B L E !
SALVATORE ALOJ (a doctor in medicine) boasts of being the co-Founder and President (1997-1999)of the
Italian Medical Society of Great Britain , which comprises of tens of italian speaking doctors, therefore,
it would have not taken him a lot to set-up an interdisciplinary panel of experts to go and assess Ms. Margherita
Caminita's psyco-physic conditions .
Perhaps the Italian Medical Society of Great Britain wishes NOT to get involved !